Apple has long enjoyed the reputation of making a computing platform that provides security protection that is superior to its peers—in a word, Microsoft. The emergence of a group of malicious software (malware) programs in recent months—collectively known as Flashback or Flashfake—that specifically target Macs and their OS X operating system now has Apple in the unfamiliar position of being on the defensive.

Apple has been able to avoid such security problems in the past for a number of reasons. For nearly two decades, Microsoft's success has kept it in the crosshairs of cyber criminals by virtue of Windows's popularity and, at least early on, the company's inattentiveness to bolstering security as the operating system grew more complex. Beginning in 2003 Microsoft became infamous for "Patch Tuesday," a monthly release of security patches (sometimes dozens at a time) to fix problems in its operating system, along with Internet Explorer and other software. Apple was a relatively minor player in the PC market, attracting little attention from cyber criminals who could make more money exploiting Windows. The same year Microsoft introduced Patch Tuesday, Macs represented less than 1.5 percent of desktop computers and less than 3.5 percent of laptop computers worldwide.

Macs still represent only a small portion of the overall worldwide computer market, but their share has risen to roughly 7 percent in recent years and is expected to grow steadily. In the U.S., Apple last year owned more than 10 percent of the PC market, behind only HP and Dell, according to technology research firm Gartner. Mac users can expect more incidents like Flashback will follow.

"In the computer community we've been saying for five, six, seven years that Mac is not more immune to computer viruses than Windows PCs or even Linux boxes, " says Nicolas Christin, associate director of Carnegie Mellon University's Information Networking Institute. "The only reason Macs were not massively targeted is that they didn't have enough of a market share to make them interesting for a hacker to devote resources to try to compromise those machines. Now that they've acquired a fairly sizeable market share, it makes sense that the bad guys would focus some attention on the Mac platform."

Popularity contest
Market share certainly plays a role, but in subtle ways, agrees Stefan Savage, a professor of computer science and engineering at the University of California, San Diego. "Clearly, if a platform is unpopular then there is really not much interest in focusing on it," he adds. "In this regard, a platform's security depends on its popularity and the level of effort versus reward—that is, what is the expected return on effort."

For cyber attackers, the decision to write malware for a particular operating system is an investment requiring the development of new skills, the acquisition of new software programs, even the learning of new slang, Savage says. "It's not something one does lightly," he adds. "Moreover, for malware there is an established ecosystem around Windows that really helps reinforce that platform's dominance [as a target], including malware-writing tools, markets to buy and sell malware, infrastructure to deploy malware and lots of open-source information on new exploitation techniques. It takes time to build that kind of community. Market share certainly drives such things, but there is quite a bit of inertia as well."

Assessments of a computing platform's security can often be subjective, with the results often depending on a computer user's preference. There are, however, several areas where operating systems can be judged head to head, Savage says, adding that OS X has consistently been behind Windows in producing what have become standard security mechanisms. "And I'm unaware of Apple putting the level of investment into security that Microsoft has."

Of course, Microsoft's security woes in the past necessitated that the company invest heavily in security improvements. One of the company's more astute moves came in 2005 when it began hosting its BlueHat conferences at Microsoft's headquarters in Redmond, Wash. At BlueHat Microsoft engineers meet face to face with members of the hacker community to discuss vulnerabilities in Windows.

What is the difference?
OS X suffers from the same security flaws as Windows, and can be exploited just as maliciously by cyber criminals, says Antti Tikkanen, director of security response at F-Secure Corp., a Helsinki-based provider of security research and antivirus software. "From the pure operating system viewpoint, I don't think there is a big difference between recent versions of Windows—Windows 7, in particular—and OS X with regard to security," he says.

Given that the amount of effort required to successfully break into a Windows PC or a Mac is roughly the same, it comes down to economics. Cyber attackers want to infect as many computers as possible without investing more money to buy new types of malware—which can cost hundreds or even thousands of dollars—and without having to acquire new skills required to write malware for more than one platform, according to Tikkanen. Although malware that targets Windows PCs has existed on the black market for years, there is no real market for OS X malware or for tools designed to write OS X malware, he says, adding, "This is what keeps the scale of attacks against OS X low: the current attackers need to build their own tools, and this limits the number of bad guys that will go after you."

Java spills
Apple is making Java software patches as well as a Flashback-removal tool available on its Web site. Some security vendors have set up Web sites to test whether a Mac has been infected. Flashback found its way onto Macs by exploiting a flaw in Java, which translates certain Web applications into code that can executed by different operating systems, including OS X and Windows. Apple's patches, however, will work only for Macs running OS X Lion and Mac OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard). Still, about 17 percent of Mac users—roughly 10 million people—are running older versions of OS X not eligible for any security updates. Those ineligible for a patch have been advised by a number of security experts to disable Java in their Web browsers, at least until they can update to Java's latest version.

Apple had known about the Java vulnerability since January, when Oracle Corp. (which owns the rights to Java after purchasing Java creator Sun Microsystems in 2009) issued a patch to correct the problem. Apple, however, does not use Oracle's patches and chose to write its own version, which it did not make available until April 12. Flashback did much of its damage during those three months.

Java has proved itself a security liability over the years, in part because most computer users do not regularly install the security patches required to keep the bad guys out of their computers, says Marcus Carey, security researcher for Rapid7, a Boston-based information-technology security services firm. The situation is worse for Mac users because they generally do not install antivirus software, which serves as another layer of protection, he adds.

Flashback's greatest legacy will likely be as a security wake-up call for Mac users. "The attitude that Mac does not have malware is dated," Tikkanen says. "So Mac users should follow the same safety precautions as Windows users. My tip for both Mac and PC users would be to switch off Java if you don't need it, and remember to update the rest of your software."